3 jump or mousewheel scripts make all the difference in the world when bunnyhopping. You will, with some practice, quite literally never miss a skip. Hit the button a fraction of a second too early with only a button bound, and you stop dead.
No difference my foot.
I too was an adament player of Tribes 2, and while scripts caused a large detriment to the game when they first came out, people adapted to them, and ended up eventually creating scripts that canceled each other out. For example, early on you could make the autoflare whiff by getting a lock, not firing, then breaking lock and getting another. Run the gunner out of flares, and get sweet tone on him.
So, then it so happened that you only flared if you had a missile coming after you. What was the counter? The auto missile script - as soon as you get tone you automatically launch a missile. People (at least those I played with) would stand on the top of a hill, jet as high as they could, get tone for a split second and fire, and still hit the bomber because the angle was too shallow between the bomber, flare, and shooter.
Scripts, at least the most common ones like that, changed the way the game was played, but it didn't destroy it. Instead, people adapted and got over it.
The debate over scripts comes down to what I call the essentialists and the purists. The essentialists see the game in terms of the basic, fundamental skills of shooting, biting, tactics and strategy, and see no problem modifying functions of the game. They see the absolutes, and pay no heed to the particulars.
The purists see the game as every aspect presented all at once, each one part of a delicate balance. They argue that when you change, or modify one, you destroy the absolutes.
Mr. Ben is an example of an essentialist, and U235 a purist. The problem does not involve individual scripts, it involves a simple assumption about the game itself: Are we going to give the developers absolute control over the balance of the game, or are we going to modify gameplay ourselves through augmenting already existing skills?
That said, neither viewpoint is fully wrong, and neither is fully right. They both have their valid points, but both also show some degree of ignorance.
Yes, changing some parts of the game will not affect it completely and a balance may be found, but in a game as delicate as NS, one change may break the whole game.
And yes, allowing no change will standardize the playing field, but in a game like NS where balance rests on a razor's edge, the slightest mistake by the playtesting team can break the game as bad as the worst scripts would.
Both of you are
ing nuts
.
The solution to this is simple. We, as a community, the entire community of NS players, need to define the particulars of which scripts are acceptable and which are not. Is bunnyhopping a part of the game? Put it to a poll on the front of ns.org. If yes, then code in a _special key or a 3 jump key, and put it right next to the pop-up menu in the control bind section.
If no, then block any bind involving both ; and +jump.
Are leapbite and blinkswipe legal binds?
Yes - hardcode it in.
No - block any bind that has both +attack and slot* in it.
et. al.
Then we can get on to more important things, like fixing the fade/shotgun balance.
